Not in the News: Commission Report Outlines Needed Election Reforms

Do you trust our voting system? Polls show that many Americans doubt it.

To build confidence, The Commission on Federal Election Reform was created to review the current election system and release a report with recommendations to make it better.

On September 19, 2005, the commission did just that. The report got startlingly little press coverage, but WomenMatter brings these important findings to you.

The Commission

The high-profile commission was headed by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James A. Baker III. In cooperation with American University’s Center for Democracy and Election Management, the commission conducted hearings to investigate electoral politics and came up with a five-pillar solution.

The five pillars

The first of the five pillars is an up-to-date registration list that would be made available to the public. The commission proposes that states -- not localities, as it is now -- would be responsible for maintaining accurate lists. Further, state lists would be linked together and maintained in some sort of national database that would be able to recognize and remove interstate duplicates, which is one form of voting fraud.

This system would be convenient for voters, who would have to register only once in their lifetime and then could easily update their personal information when it changes.

The second pillar

The second pillar involves a voter identification system that the commission hopes would be both accurate (integrity) and easy to access (inclusion). Noting the congressional debate between integrity and inclusion, the commission claims its suggestion would address both.

They propose a voter ID card that would be free and easy to maintain for those without drivers’ licenses. During the transitional period, those without IDs would fill out a provisional ballot that would be counted once their signature is verified.

The ID-debate is hot in Congress, where Democrats claim that requiring a driver’s license would keep those without from voting - namely the poor and the elderly, who traditionally vote Democratic. The commission’s idea addresses this concern, and also suggests that states reach out to non-drivers by creating mobile registration centers.

William Hannon, a professor of law at Loyola Law School who testified before the committee, further suggested that states record voters’ thumbprints when they get the voter ID card. In case the card is lost or stolen, those who show up at the polls without ID can use their thumbprints to verify their identities. The commission did not adopt this recommendation.

In an editorial in the Christian Science Monitor, Hannon pointed out that the commission stifled dissent against the voter ID cards. Professor Spencer Overton, who was on the commission, was prevented from publishing his 597- word dissent because the commission limited him to 250 words.

The third pillar

The third pillar addresses the integrity/access debate as well. The commission suggests that states put more effort into registering their citizens and informing voters before elections.

The report encourages states to experiment with voting centers to make voting more convenient. In addition, the commission believes that federal, state, and local officials should publicly report their investigations of election fraud and do more to prevent absentee ballot fraud.

The third pillar also reinstates voting rights to non-violent ex-felons who have completed their sentences.

The fourth pillar

The commission calls for voting machines that leave a paper trail so that voters can be confident that their votes were counted accurately. They also encourage independent testing of voting machines with Election Assistance Commission oversight.

Republicans object to requiring the paper trail. They say that telling states what kind of technology to use oversteps the boundaries of states’ rights or, federalism.

The fifth and final pillar

The commission urged regional primaries, as opposed to the current state-by-state system that allows states to hold primary elections whenever they like.

They also included Hannon’s proposition to remove election responsibilities from secretaries of state and give them to nonpartisan professional election administrators who are appointed by the governor and confirmed by a supermajority of the state legislature.

Hannon explains that the U.S. is one of the few democracies in the world that has partisan election officials who may campaign during an election.

Congress’ reaction

Members of Congress say they simply don’t have time to reconsider election reforms. The Senate is already behind on appropriations bills, and both houses of Congress are swamped with Hurricane Katrina-related legislation.

Congressional Quarterly reports that a Republican aide said: "The prospects for any congressional action in this session are almost nil." And a Democratic counterpart claimed: "The commission’s report will gather dust on a shelf."

Further, chairman of the House Administration Commission, Bob Ney (R-Ohio), is hesitant to amend the 2002 Help Americans Vote Act when it hasn’t been fully implemented yet.

For years and years, many people thought Republicans were worried about fraud (all those jokes about voting early and often) and Democrats were worried about poor people being discouraged from voting (because they were more likely to vote Democratic). This Commission is an important bipartisan leap.

The Commission would probably disagree with Congress’ hesitation to apply important election reforms. As Professor Hannon said in his editorial, "[If] election reform issues are swept under the rug until 2008, it will be too late to fix problems in time to avert a potential election meltdown. Like dealing with hurricanes or earthquakes, advanced planning is the key to avoiding disaster."

Should Congress push now for election reforms? How important is a fair and accurate voting system? Do you know anyone who doesn’t vote because she fears that she won’t be counted? What reforms are needed at your polling place?

What do you think?

WomenMatter is a place to discuss life issues with other women. We don’t want to wedge women apart, but rather bring them together to dialogue. To participate in our blog, click here.

WomenMatter encourages women to educate themselves on the issues and then approach their representatives with ideas.

Your voice is vital. Make sure your leaders know what’s important to you. To see how your representatives vote and to contact them, click here.

WomenMatter is dedicated to empowering women to participate in the political process. To do this we have invested in the most in-depth NONPARTISAN information, because we trust each woman to make up her own mind.

• We track nine issues every week and update this website several times a week.
• We launch after school GirlsMatter Clubs in middle and high schools to grow the next generation of politically aware women through a full curriculum and startup kit on girlsmatter.com.
• We do continuous research to make sure that we are meeting the needs of women across the country of all ages, races, incomes, preferences, and religions.
• We provide partnerships with nonpartisan organizations that provide services to women and advocate for them.

We offer all our services free of charge without memberships or subscriptions. To help us maintain this work - not just in election years but as a continuing part of women’s lives - please make a tax deductible donation, click here.

Update Posted on: 9/24/2005